You're given an opportunity...

This is a discussion on You're given an opportunity... within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; I've recently started reading different blogs on the internet...it's a fairly interesting and humbling hobby, to realize that there are people out there who spend ...

You're given an opportunity...

I've recently started reading different blogs on the internet...it's a fairly interesting and humbling hobby, to realize that there are people out there who spend a lot of time and effort reacting to these things...

Anyway, I find that as I read each new blog, I find more and more blogs that I enjoy reading, and so I start reading the back posts...

He references another blogger who apparently posted the question first, but anyway... how would you respond to this?

The question is if you and one anti-gunner were given the opportunity to sit down and re-write all of the nations gun laws, where you would compromise? In what areas would you be willing to give a little to get a little?

Any responses? Please be level headed, and be willing to back up your arguments. I understand what shall not be infringed means (and I agree with you), but I would prefer to hear compromise ideas...

--Jim

Last edited by firefighter4884; October 19th, 2007 at 04:56 AM.
Reason: Added the last paragraph...

"Sure, As long as the machines are workin' and you can call 911. But you take those things away, you throw people in the dark, and you scare the crap out of them; no more rules...You'll see how primitive they can get."

Elimination of Prohibited Persons list. If they've done something worthy of prohibiting ownership of arms, they shouldn't be out of custody in the first place

Elimination of interstate commerce controls on arms, other than to prevent state-to-state tarriffs

Elimination of current and future fed, state, & local restrictions on classes of arms, with exceptions to be fought over (NBC may be an exception, "assault weapons", machine guns, explosives would not not). Either they allow arms or they don't

Castle Doctrine / No duty to retreat

Protection from Civil action after justified self-defense

No registration or ownership licencing

No purchase or posession limits. If I want to buy up the entire inventory of a gun shop, I should be able to do so

Things to possibly consider with a very suspicious eye:

Weapons Carry Licence - Must be shall issue to anyone who wants one with as little delay and red-tape as possible. Would have to allow open or concealed carry of any man-portable weapon anywhere

NBC restrictions, so long as non-lethal chemical weapons are excluded

Possibly tarriffs on imported arms, but to no greater degree than other imported commerce, and no "sporting purposes" or functionality nonsense

Firearm discharge regulations requiring certain safety measures to be taken within city limits (appropriate backstop, etc), with exceptions for lawful use of force

"A well-educated electorate, being necessary to the continuance of a free state, the right of the people to keep and read books shall not be infringed."
Is this hard to understand? Then why does it get unintelligible to some people when 5 little words are changed?

I would accept gun free zones in areas with armed guards. IF the controlling authority was legally libel for my safety.

I would accept registration of weapons carried in public.

I would accept government funded training and testing requirements for the purchase of firearms. This training should also be offered in all public high schools.

I would accept age restrictions on the sale of firearms to minors.

I would be willing to accept a ban on the transferring to, or possession of, a firearm by a person defined by the courts as a danger to himself or others do to mental instability, or criminal history.

I would accept a “One a month” law for weapons capable, without modification, of fully automatic fire, and I would accept registration and tracking of full auto firearms, and a requirement that in order to 'keep and bear' fully automatic arms, you must pledge, under oath, a willing to use those arms in defense of this nation as a member of a militia unit.

I would accept a law stating that no center fire ammunition sold to the public may contain a bullet larger than .50 caliber and a total ban on civilian use of incendiary or explosive rounds.

I would also be willing to define the word “Arms” as all weapons of a type of design that has been, is being, or may be, issued to a common military combatant of the US armed forces, not to include crew severed weapon systems. And I would be willing to define the term "A well regulated militia" as a group of individual citizens, or legal aliens seeking citizenship who has maintained a residence in the United States for more that one continuous year, that are willing to to provide privately kept arms in defense of the Nation.

We have been compromising with idiots since this nation was founded...therrfore I would accept NO compromise when it comes to firearms. What has compromise gotten us thus far ? Over 20,000 various gunlaws, many of them conflicting. Restrictions bases on how weapons look. Registration of firearms in various places...which History proves over and over that registration is the first step before confiscation.

Compromise is for people that aren't sure of what they want. IF you want a "right" to stay a right, you do not compromise with people that do not understand that concept.

Deacon, you've got a long way to go. Your willingness to "compromise" is exactly why we are where we are today.

I would accept gun free zones in areas with armed guards. IF the controlling authority was legally libel for my safety.

You choose to put the safety of yourself and your family into someone else's hands. That legal libel ain't worth squat if you or your family get killed.

I would accept registration of weapons carried in public.

Registration of weapons only serves one purpose and that is to confiscate. There is no other purpose.

I would accept government funded training and testing requirements for the purchase of firearms. This training should also be offered in all public high schools.

Think again. How Hillary and Mrs. Brady would smile and rub her hands over this one.How hard would it be to mandate a test so hard, so difficult that no one could pass ? testing requirements set by the enemy. Oh yeah...that'd be great.

I would accept a “One a month” law for weapons capable, without modification, of fully automatic fire, and I would accept registration and tracking of full auto firearms, and a requirement that in order to 'keep and bear' fully automatic arms, you must pledge, under oath, a willing to use those arms in defense of this nation as a member of a militia unit.

And just what purpose would "one gun a month" serve ? Signing a pledge to do something is only as good as the intent of the individual. Most of the time, its not worth the paper its written on.

would accept a law stating that no center fire ammunition sold to the public may contain a bullet larger than .50 caliber and a total ban on civilian use of incendiary or explosive rounds.

Another useless restriction. Show me at least one crime that was committed using one of these rounds. Am I missing it? It this another compromise that has no bearing in reality?

Compromise is a dirty word. The only time you compromise your rights is if the enemy has kicked your tail in battle and threatens you with certain death if you don't. You compromise if you are willing to live under the terms that he dictates. That is the only acceptable time and reason for compromise there is.

Your in AK, I'm in MD. Here, as a gun owner, I have no right to carry. To buy a scary looking semi-automatic rifle or a hand gun I have to not only pass the federal instant back ground check, but I must also pass a state police back ground check and wait a minimum of 7 days (I have waited up to 20). By law, I may not keep a firearm in my home without a lock, since I have kids under the age of 16. No matter what, I may not own a hang-gun with magazine forward of the grip, a forward grip, or place a forward grip on a handgun. I can only buy handguns from a state approved list. I can only buy one regulated (hand guns, assault rifles as defined by the AWB) per month unless I notify the state police that I am a collector.

And the question posed was not, "What would I like" or "What would be effective" it was what would I be willing to accept.

I will be willing to accept signing a oath that I am willing to use my fully automatic weapons in defense of the nation. After all I am willing to do so. I would be willing to supply the government with information of my weapons. I do think training and testing of people that go armed in public will make the sheep feel safer, and I train every chance I get anyway. And what does it matter if exploding rounds have never been used in a crime? Saying your willing to ban them makes the sheep feel like they are getting something.

And compromise is not why we are in the boat we are in today, it's the unwillingness to compromise that any power we have to influence the debate.

And compromise is not why we are in the boat we are in today, it's the unwillingness to compromise that any power we have to influence the debate.

Maybe because it shouldn't be a debate. No one should ever have to compromise their individual freedom.

I can understand your frustrations because you live in a crappy state that gives you no freedom, but the amount of restrictions that you would be willing to accept makes the 2nd Amendment pointless in the manner it is written.

I would support an additional mandatory 20 year prison sentence (with no time off for good behavior) for any criminal/thug that commits an armed robbery, rape, assault, home invasion etc., type felony with a firearm.

That should solve most of the firearm crime problem and take MUCH of the heat and focus off of legitimate and legal, upstanding American citizens BECAUSE most truly violent crime is committed by repeat offenders who are constantly being released back into the public sector.

All of the money now being spent to enforce unworkable gun laws could be better spent building an enormous prison out in the middle of some barren desert.

It would also give younger gun toting criminals PLENTY of contemplation time to learn to grow up and fly straight since an individual that robs a bank with firearm when he is 20 years old will be at LEAST 40 years old before he/she walks the streets again.
Probably 50 years old---adding 10 years for the actual robbery.

I would be willing to supply the government with information of my weapons.

What good could come from it? Show me one instance of any added value of the government having that information.

I do think training and testing of people that go armed in public will make the sheep feel safer, and I train every chance I get anyway.

Please explain to me why I should care that people that arent smart enough to talke responsibility for their own well being should matter to me.

And what does it matter if exploding rounds have never been used in a crime? Saying your willing to ban them makes the sheep feel like they are getting something.

Please explain to me why banning something that has never been an issue is supposed to make me feel better. Personally, I am not willing to ban anything just for the sake of making "sheep feel like they are getting something."

You ban something today, whats it gonna be tommorrow?

And compromise is not why we are in the boat we are in today, it's the unwillingness to compromise that any power we have to influence the debate.

That is always the debate. What you are willing to compromise, I am not. If you look at the difference in gunlaws between Arkansas and Maryland, it is vast.

It is vast because the people in Maryland have compromised issues that the people in Arkansas did not.

Plain and simple. You want to compromise your rights to pacify people that will never be satisfied until you have no rights left to compromise.

You fail to understand that its not about guns...its about Power. Those egotistical maniacs that are intoxicated with Power wont rest until they can control everything and everyone. Having or owning guns does not fit into their agenda...an agenda that many good people unwillingly assist in because they dont realize it.

Registration of weapons only serves one purpose and that is to confiscate. There is no other purpose.

Wrong! The other purpose is to take your money in the form of registration fees, which can also allow them to be set so high that the average person and even some of the higher paid serfs can no longer afford to "register" their fireams.

The idea of a mandatory 20 yr. prison term, with no parole, time off for good behavior, no cunjugal visiting rights, etc., for any violent crimes should be required. Maybe we could even include campaign fraud, treason, selling patents and secret information to the Chinese, fraud for executives siphoning peoples life savings out of their retirement accounts, failure to live up to the oath to protect and defend the Constitution as written, judges who want to create new law from the bench or base opinions on international law. Oops! That would eliminate an awful lot of politicians. On the other hand......

Maybe we could start subsidizing Sheriff Joe Arpaio down in Maricopa County. He's the only one around that you hear about that knows how to treat prisoners properly!

Reason first in the form of a question: Ever been held-up at gunpoint? Here's the compromise you will be offered: Your money or your life--and it better be enough money or the BG will take it and your life. The day it happened to me: for the fourth time; the place; two doors from my home; the time: broad daylight mid morning; well that destroyed any willingness on my part to compromise ever again on my right to own and carry a gun.

So the anti (and his/her ilk) can have half of California OR half of New York, sufficient time to move there and all the gun laws they want. They can come and go as they please to other parts of the US as long as they never express a gun opinion anywhere in the free area, ever!

And in the free area, we start back at the 2nd amendment and with these ideas: that criminals go to jail for very long periods of time; some may be executed for their crimes. That parents are solely responsible for their spawn and that you become an adult when they say so-typically when you can pay for your choices--a car, a house, a gun.

We may or may not need any more gun laws--I'm willing to wait and see.

Originally Posted by firefighter4884

I've recently started reading different blogs on the internet...it's a fairly interesting and humbling hobby, to realize that there are people out there who spend a lot of time and effort reacting to these things...

Anyway, I find that as I read each new blog, I find more and more blogs that I enjoy reading, and so I start reading the back posts...